Skip to main content

Full text of "USPTO Patents Application 10055207"

See other formats


United States Patent and Trademark Office 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 
United States Patent and Trademark Office 
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS 
P.O. Box 1450 

Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 
www.uspto.gov 



[ ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. | CONFIRMATION NO. | 



APPLICATION NO. 



FILING DATE 



FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 



10/055,207 



46404 



10/19/2001 



Sachin G. Deshpande 



7590 



10/17/2006 

MARGER JOHNSON & MCCOLLOM, P.C. 
210 SW MORRISON STREET, SUITE 400 
PORTLAND, OR 97204 



8371-144 



5056 



EXAMINER 



MILLS, DONALD L 



ART UNIT 



PAPER NUMBER 



2616 

DATE MAILED: 10/17/2006 



] 



Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. 



PTO-90C (Rev. 10/03) 



4 



Office Action Summary 


Application No. 

10/055,207 


Applicant(s) 

DESHPANDE, SACHIN G. 


Examiner 

Donald L. Mills 


Art Unit 

2616 





-- The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address - 
Period for Reply 



A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS, 
WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION. 

- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1 .136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed 
after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication. 

- If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication. 

- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 1 33). 
Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any 
earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b). 

Status 

1 )S Responsive to communication(s) filed on 1 1 January 2006 . 
2a)D This action is FINAL. 2b)El This action is non-final. 

3) D Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is 

closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 1 1 , 453 O.G. 213. 

Disposition of Claims 

4) E<] Claim(s) 1-22 is/are pending in the application. 

4a) Of the above claim(s) is/are withdrawn from consideration. 

5) D Claim(s) is/are allowed. 

6) ^ Claim(s) 1-22 is/are rejected. 

7) D Claim(s) is/are objected to. 

8) D Claim(s) are subject to restriction and/or election requirement. 

Application Papers 

9) D The specification is objected to by the Examiner. 

10)D The drawing(s) filed on is/are: a)D accepted or b)D objected to by the Examiner. 

Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1 .85(a). 

Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1 .121 (d). 
1 !)□ The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152. 

Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 

12)D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 1 19(a)-(d) or (f). 
a)D All b)D Some * c)Q None of: 

1 .□ Certified copies of the priority documents have been received. 

2. Q Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. . 

3. D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage 

application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)). 
* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received. 



Attachment(s) 

1) ^ Notice of References Cited (PTO-892) 

2) □ Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948) 

3) □ Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08) 

Paper No(s)/Mail Date . 

U .S. Patent and Trademark Office "~ — 

PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06) Office 



4) □ Interview Summary (PTO-413) 

Paper No(s)/Mail Date. . 

5) D Notice of Informal Patent Application 

6) □ Other: . 



Summary Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20061013 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 
Art Unit: 2616 



Page 2 



DETAILED ACTION 

Claim Objections 

1. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: 

Regarding claim 1, line 6, "data" should be corrected to - said enhancement layer -. 
Regarding claim 1, line 8, "another layer" should be corrected to - said enhancement 

layer -. 

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 

2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all 
obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: 

(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in 
section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are 
such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person 
having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the 
manner in which the invention was made. 

3. Claims 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chaddha et 
al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,768,535), hereinafter referred to as Chaddha, in view of Baker et al. (US 
6,775,231 Bl), hereinafter referred to as Baker. 

Referring to claims 1,13, and 17, Chaddha et al. discloses a method for transmitting data 
over a transmission channel, comprising: 

Accepting, at an input of a data transmitter (see Fig. 1), data that has been encoded into 
a base layer (base layer, col. 3 lines 1 1-22 and 37-52, col. 5 lines 21-30, col. 7 lines 1-15, col. 9 
lines 27-45 and col. 10 lines 25-35) and an enhancement layer (enhancement layer, col. 3 lines 
1 1-22, col. 3 lines 36-52, col. 5 line 1 and 22-29, col. 9 lines 27-43 and col. 10 lines 17-29); 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 Page 3 

Art Unit: 2616 

transmitting the base layer (base layer, col. 3 lines 1 1-22 and 37-52, col. 5 lines 21-30, col. 7 
lines 1-15, col. 9 lines 27-45 and col. 10 lines 25-35) on the transmission channel. 

Chaddha does not disclose determining if there is enough bandwidth available to the data 
transmitter to transmit data in addition to the base layer already transmitted; and transmitting 
the enhancement layer if there is enough bandwidth available to transmit another layer. 

Essentially, the claimed invention teaches encoding data into multiple traffic classes 
requiring different levels of Quality of Service (QoS). Chaddha teaches the importance of traffic 
management with QoS by scaling the frame-rate to the desired transmission rate by dropping 
frames, thereby, intelligently prioritizing certain frames with higher priority over frames with 
lower priority (See column 6, lines 46-67.) Baker teaches a dynamic weighted resource sharing 
system and method in which resource allocation is dynamically scheduled for each traffic class, 
frames with higher priority than other lower priority frames, (for example, a base and 
enhancement layer) based on actual traffic load measured for each service class (See column 5, 
lines 22-43.) 

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention 
to implement the dynamic resource scheduling of Baker in the system of Chaddha. One of 
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to maintain frame priority 
during transmission of the base layer and enhancement layer via designated traffic classes, 
thereby, eliminating the need to drop frames on a congested or bandwidth starved link as taught 
by Chaddha (See column 2, lines 52-55.) 

Regarding claim 2 as explained in the rejection statement of claim 1, Chaddha and Baker 
disclose all of the claim limitations of claim 1 (parent claim). 



Application/Control Number: 1 0/055,207 Page 4 

Art Unit: 2616 

Chaddha does not disclose wherein determining if there is enough bandwidth available to 
the data transmitter to transmit data in addition to the base layer comprises calculating a 
bandwidth previously used by the data transmitter in previously transmitting layers. 

Chaddha teaches the importance of traffic management with QoS by scaling the frame- 
rate to the desired transmission rate by dropping frames, thereby, intelligently prioritizing certain 
frames with higher priority over frames with lower priority (See column 6, lines 46-67.) Baker 
teaches a dynamic weighted resource sharing system and method in which resource allocation is 
dynamically scheduled for each traffic class, frames with higher priority than other lower priority 
frames, (for example, a base and enhancement layer) based on actual traffic load measured for 
each service class (See column 5, lines 22-43.) 

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention 
to implement the dynamic resource scheduling of Baker in the system of Chaddha. One of 
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to maintain frame priority 
during transmission of the base layer and enhancement layer via designated traffic classes, 
thereby, eliminating the need to drop frames on a congested or bandwidth starved link as taught 
by Chaddha (See column 2, lines 52-55.) 

Regarding claims 3, 14, 16, and 18-20 as explained in the rejection statement of claims 1, 
13, and 17; Chaddha and Baker disclose all of the claim limitations of claims 1,13, and 17 
(parent claims). 

Chaddha does not disclose wherein determining if there is enough bandwidth available to 
the data transmitter to transmit data in addition to the base layer comprises measuring data 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 Page 5 

Art Unit: 2616 

traffic on the transmission channel to determine if enough bandwidth exists to transmit 
additional layers. 

Chaddha teaches the importance of traffic management with QoS by scaling the frame- 
rate to the desired transmission rate by dropping frames, thereby, intelligently prioritizing certain 
frames with higher priority over frames with lower priority (See column 6, lines 46-67.) Baker 
teaches a dynamic weighted resource sharing system and method in which resource allocation is 
dynamically scheduled for each traffic class, frames with higher priority than other lower priority 
frames, (for example, a base and enhancement layer) based on actual traffic load measured for 
each service class (See column 5, lines 22-43.) 

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention 
to implement the dynamic resource scheduling of Baker in the system of Chaddha. One of 
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to maintain frame priority 
during transmission of the base layer and enhancement layer via designated traffic classes, 
thereby, eliminating the need to drop frames on a congested or bandwidth starved link as taught 
by Chaddha (See column 2, lines 52-55.) 

Regarding claims 4-7 and 15 as explained in the rejection statement of claims 1 and 13, 
Chaddha and Baker disclose all of the claim limitations of claims 1 and 13 (parent claims). 

Chaddha does not disclose wherein the data transmitter has a preset target data rate, 
and wherein determining if there is enough bandwidth available to the data transmitter to 
transmit data in addition to the base layer already transmitted comprises determining whether 
an average bandwidth used by the data transmitter over a last measuring period is below the 
preset target data rate. 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 Page 6 

Art Unit: 2616 

Chaddha teaches the importance of traffic management with QoS by scaling the frame- 
rate to the desired transmission rate by dropping frames, thereby, intelligently prioritizing certain 
frames with higher priority over frames with lower priority (See column 6, lines 46-67.) Baker 
teaches a dynamic weighted resource sharing system and method in which resource allocation is 
dynamically scheduled for each traffic class, frames with higher priority than other lower priority 
frames, (for example, a base and enhancement layer) based on the averaged traffic load measured 
for each service class over a period of time and the maximum transmission rate (See column 5, 
lines 22-43 and column 6, lines 1-6.) 

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention 
to implement the dynamic resource scheduling of Baker in the system of Chaddha. One of 
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to maintain frame priority 
during transmission of the base layer and enhancement layer via designated traffic classes, 
thereby, eliminating the need to drop frames on a congested or bandwidth starved link as taught 
by Chaddha (See column 2, lines 52-55.) 

Referring to claims 8, 21, and 22 as explained in the rejection statement of claims 1 and 
17; Chaddha and Baker disclose all of the claim limitations of claims 1 and 17 (parent claims). 
Chaddha further teaches wherein the data is additionally encoded as a second enhancement 
layer (second enhancement layer, col. 3 lines 1 1-22, col. 3 lines 36-52, col. 5 line 1 and 22-29, 
col. 9 lines 27-43 and col. 10 lines 17-29.) 

Chaddha does not disclose determining if there is enough bandwidth available to the data 
transmitter to transmit data in addition to the base and enhancement already transmitted by the 



Application/Control Number: 1 0/055,207 Page 7 

Art Unit: 2616 

data transmitter; and transmitting the second enhancement layer available to transmit the 
second enhancement layer. 

Chaddha teaches the importance of traffic management with QoS by scaling the frame- 
rate to the desired transmission rate by dropping frames, thereby, intelligently prioritizing certain 
frames with higher priority over frames with lower priority (See column 6, lines 46-67.) Baker 
teaches a dynamic weighted resource sharing system and method in which resource allocation is 
dynamically scheduled for each traffic class, frames with higher priority than other lower priority 
frames, (for example, a base layer and first/second enhancement layers) based on the averaged 
traffic load measured for each service class over a period of time and the maximum transmission 
rate (See column 5, lines 22-43 and column 6, lines 1-6.) 

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention 
to implement the dynamic resource scheduling of Baker in the system of Chaddha. One of 
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to maintain frame priority 
during transmission of the base layer and enhancement layer via designated traffic classes, 
thereby, eliminating the need to drop frames on a congested or bandwidth starved link as taught 
by Chaddha (See column 2, lines 52-55.) 

Referring to claim 9, the primary reference further teaches wherein transmitting the base 
layer on the transmission channel comprises transmitting the base layer (base layer, col. 3 lines 
1 1-22 and 37-52 col. 5 lines 21-30, col. 7 lines 1-15, col. 9 lines 27-45 and col. 10 lines 25-35) 
on a LAN (see Network, Fig. 1) connection between two or more computers. 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 Page 8 

Art Unit: 2616 

Referring to claim 10, the primary reference further teaches wherein transmitting the 
base layer on the transmission channel comprises transmitting data from a media server to an 
image projector (Fig. 1 ref. sign 180 and respective portions of the spec). 

Referring to claim 1 1, the primary reference further teaches wherein transmitting the 
base layer on the transmission channel comprises transmitting data from a media server to a 
decoding device (decoder, Fig. 1 ref. sign 40 and respective portions of the spec). 

Regarding claim 12 as explained in rejection statement of claim 1, Chaddha and Baker 
teach all of the claim limitations of claim 1 (parent claim). 

Chaddha does not disclose determining if there is enough bandwidth available to the data 
transmitter to transmit data in addition to the base layer already transmitted comprises 
calculating at least two average bandwidths used by the data transmitter, each of the average 
bandwidths calculated over different measuring periods. 

Chaddha teaches the importance of traffic management with QoS by scaling the frame- 
rate to the desired transmission rate by dropping frames, thereby, intelligently prioritizing certain 
frames with higher priority over frames with lower priority (See column 6, lines 46-67.) Baker 
teaches a dynamic weighted resource sharing system and method in which resource allocation is 
dynamically scheduled for each traffic class, frames with higher priority than other lower priority 
frames, (for example, a base layer and first/second enhancement layers) based on the averaged 
traffic load measured for each service class over a period of time and the maximum transmission 
rate (See column 5, lines 22-43 and column 6, lines 1-6.) 

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention 
to implement the dynamic resource scheduling of Baker with two average calculations in the 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 Page 9 

Art Unit: 2616 

system of Chaddha. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order 
to maintain frame priority during transmission of the base layer and enhancement layer via 
designated traffic classes, thereby, eliminating the need to drop frames on a congested or 
bandwidth starved link as taught by Chaddha (See column 2, lines 52-55.) 

Response to Arguments 

4. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-22 have been considered but are moot in 
view of the new ground(s) of rejection. 

Conclusion 

5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the 
examiner should be directed to Donald L. Mills whose telephone number is 571-272-3094. The 
examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. 

If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's 
supervisor, Seema Rao can be reached on 571-272-3174. The fax phone number for the 
organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 



Application/Control Number: 10/055,207 



Page 10 



Art Unit: 2616 

Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent 
Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications 
may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished 
applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR 
system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR 
system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would 
like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated 
information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. 




Donald L Mills 



SUPERVISORY PATENT EXAMINER 
TECHNOLOGY CENTER 2600 



October 13, 2006